−−⏑⏑¦⏑−,⏑¦−⏑−− irregular
Addhā hi Bhagavā pahāsi dukkhaṁ, Smith (PJ II, p. 639) suggests that this line is Vaitālīya (by which I can only presume he means Opacchandasaka), but if that is so the metre is still wrong, with a short 3rd syllable (presumably). However, that a mattacchandas line would be found in such an ancient collection at all seems to me to be an anachronism.18

−−⏑−(⏑⏑−),¦−⏑−¦−⏑−−
appeva maṁ Bhagavā BJT prints Bhagavā in brackets. It is probably an insertion by the recitor to clarify the context. Otherwise we could exclude aṭṭhitaṁ, which can be understood as it occurs in line b.22 aṭṭhitaṁ ovadeyya!”

84 (1059) 4-12

−−⏑−,¦−⏑−¦−⏑−−
“Yaṁ brāhmaṇaṁ vedaguṁ ChS: vedagum-23 ābhijaññā, PTS, Thai: abhijaññā, ā- is m.c. Ven. Medhaṅkara points out that this is better read as a 2nd person singular optative (though CNidd glosses abhijāneyya, ājāneyya etc. taking it as 3rd person), in which case the regular form would be abhijaññāsi, and -si has been lost m.c. 24Mettagū ti Bhagavā,ChS omits recitor's remark.25